Delhi High Court: Law students cannot be barred from exams due to attendance shortage
Press Trust of India | November 3, 2025 | 02:40 PM IST | 3 mins read
Delhi HC has asked the Bar Council of India (BCI) to modify the mandatory attendance norms. A bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Amit Sharma passed the order while disposing of a suo motu petition initiated by the Supreme Court.
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Monday ruled that no law student in the country should be detained from sitting in examinations due to lack of minimum attendance. The high court, which passed a slew of directions in relation to mandatory attendance requirement in law colleges, asked the Bar Council of India (BCI) to modify the mandatory attendance norms.
Due to the shortage of attendance, student’s promotion to next semester class cannot be withheld, it said. A bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Amit Sharma passed the order while disposing of a suo motu petition, initiated by the Supreme Court, in relation to the death of law student Sushant Rohilla by suicide in 2016 after allegedly being barred from sitting for the semester exams due to lack of requisite attendance.
“Having heard at length the submission of all stakeholders in this case over the course of hearing and having considered the stark realities that have come to the surface, this court is strongly of the view that norms education in general and legal education in particular, cannot be made so stringent so as to lead to mental trauma, let alone death of a student,” the bench said while pronouncing the verdict.
Amity Law School student's suicide
Rohilla, a third year law student of Amity , had hanged himself at his home here on August 10, 2016 after his college allegedly barred him from sitting for the semester exams due to lack of requisite attendance.
He left behind a note, saying he was a failure and did not wish to live. The present petition was initiated by the Supreme Court in September 2016 following the incident but was transferred to the high court in March 2017.
While pronouncing the judgment, the high court said, the Bar Council of India (BCI) should undertake a stakeholder consultation, including student bodies, parents and teachers for this purpose, in an expeditious manner in order to safeguard the life and mental health of students keeping in mind the impact on students at detention or non-appearance in exams due to mandatory attendance requirements can have.
Also read Expand AIBE eligibility criteria to include all final-year students, NLUSA urges BCI
No students shall be detained from taking exams
“While the consultations by the BCI are underway, in the interregnum, it is directed as under -- no student enrolled in any recognised law college, university or institution in India shall be detained from taking examination or be prevented from further academic pursuits of career progression on the ground of lack of minimum attendance,” the bench said.
It added that no law college, university or institution should be permitted to mandate norms of attendance, norms which are over and above the minimum percentage prescribed by the BCI.
Also read AI courses, industry-aligned curricula are now must: Amity University Chancellor
In so far as mandatory attendance norms fixed by the BCI are concerned, all law colleges, universities and institutions recognised which impart three year and five year degrees should, with immediate effect, implement accelerative measures, including, firstly, weekly notification of attendance of students to online portal or a mobile app, monthly notice to parents and legal guardians regarding any shortage in attendance, conducting extra physical or online classes for such students who do not fulfil the minimum attendance norms.
Follow us for the latest education news on colleges and universities, admission, courses, exams, research, education policies, study abroad and more..
To get in touch, write to us at news@careers360.com.
Next Story
]Delhi HC questions SSC order restricting post-exam paper discussions; seeks government response
The plea challenges the SSC’s September 8 notification, which warned individuals and social media platforms against analysing or sharing question papers of conducted exams. The petitioner claims that the rule exceeds the scope of the examination law.
Vikas Kumar Pandit | 3 mins readFeatured News
]- ‘Bitter experience’: DU’s 4th-year students face sudden rule changes, limited options, teacher shortage
- Maharashtra NEET Counselling: Private medical college sues for institute-level admissions, NRI quota expansion
- Maharashtra NEET Counselling: Medical college ‘confined, forced’ him to retract fee complaint, says aspirant
- MahaDBT, CAP Integration: Maharashtra students to get scholarship approvals at admission, no renewals needed
- Maharashtra: 11,000 faculty posts lie vacant; Officials say governors, finance division at fault
- BTech Courses: AI, computer science fuel enrolment boom to 5-year high, but may soon kill jobs, say experts
- Lights fade at Calcutta University’s unique Department of Applied Optics and Photonics due to staff shortage
- CBSE Board Exam 2026: Two exams for Class 10 ‘exhausting’ for teachers, cause more anxiety for students
- In poll-bound Bihar, NEP is leaving university students with endless exams, but no results or classes
- Agriculture courses in enrolment crisis: 10 Maharashtra colleges shut, over half seats vacant in 44 institutes